Since new the starter motor on the IO390 starts cranking very slowly, often having trouble getting the engine through the first compression. Once through the first compression it commences to spin up normally.

I contacted Sky Tech and they assured me the starter motor is adequate for the job. I purchased a new Odyssey Battery and had it fail three weeks later with a complete cell breakdown. The replacement battery lasted three months before breaking down. The distributor is now arguing that the Odyssey @ 170 Cold Cranking Amps (CCA) is too small and the load used for starting is destroying the battery and I should get a bigger battery and they wont warranty the current battery.

The battery case supplied by Van's will only allow one size battery fit. Perhaps builders should consider manufacturing a battery box that has some flexibility in sizing. The battery shop showed me an AGM battery about a quarter of an inch wider that had over twice the CCA of the Odyssey and asked why we didn't use that battery?

Has anyone tried a Lithium? What would I need to do to install a lithium? Are they safe in the engine space of the 14?

I wired an RV-14A for a buddy, using the Vanís FWF kit. I too believe the single firewall mounted PC-680 as bearly adequate for the job. I recommended a second PC-680, mounted on either side of the firewall and a much revised power distribution system to take advantage of the second battery. He declined, but as he too has had problems with the single battery setup I believe my recommendation to be the right course of action. But then again, Iíd never have a single battery ship.

The battery and starter you have has been used successfully to crank IO-540's
My suggestion would be that you do some investigative trouble shooting to see if you can can find the problem in the power circuit for your starter
Use this as a guide......http://skytec.aero/aircraft-starter-performance-issues/

__________________Any opinions expressed in this message are my own and not necessarily those of my employer.

Since new the starter motor on the IO390 starts cranking very slowly, often having trouble getting the engine through the first compression. Once through the first compression it commences to spin up normally.
...

Has anyone tried a Lithium? What would I need to do to install a lithium? Are they safe in the engine space of the 14?

Alan

Search this forum for EarthX. I am very happy with EX900 for over 2 years. It weighs 10 lbs less than the 680 and will spin the prop fast enough to taxi.

Alan,
This will be an unpopular opinion, but I offer it with data from owning several airplanes. When my factory new Lycoming IO-390 arrived with the Skytec starter you have I was disappointed. I had used that starter on a few airplanes with many problems. I was well aware of what Skytec would say when I called. They want you to check the voltage under load at the starter. I did all those checks before even calling, my numbers were within the tolerance they require on their website before I called. When I described my starting issues they simply increased the required voltage at the starter above the value on their website and told me to look at my wiring, again.

After owning multiple airplane with that issue I refused. They exchanged the starter you have at a horrible used value and I purchased a Skytec 149NL. It will fit without modification to your airplane. The 149NL documentation will even include instructions on how to grind down unused mounting lugs to make it fit.

CLARIFICATION: Without modification refers to the RV14 and the engine. You will need to grind off some mounting arms on the 149NL in accordance with the Skytec provided documentation. It takes just a few minutes.

My airplane ALWAYS starts easily since I discarded that starter. You can spend a lot of effort looking at your wiring or you can resolve the problem in one day.

Alan,
This will be an unpopular opinion, but I offer it with data from owning several airplanes. When my factory new Lycoming IO-390 arrived with the Skytec starter you have I was disappointed. I had used that starter on a few airplanes with many problems. I was well aware of what Skytec would say when I called. They want you to check the voltage under load at the starter. I did all those checks before even calling, my numbers were within the tolerance they require on their website before I called. When I described my starting issues they simply increased the required voltage at the starter above the value on their website and told me to look at my wiring, again.

After owning multiple airplane with that issue I refused. They exchanged the starter you have at a horrible used value and I purchased a Skytec 149NL. It will fit without modification to your airplane. The 149NL documentation will even include instructions on how to grind down unused mounting lugs to make it fit.

My airplane ALWAYS starts easily since I discarded that starter. You can spend a lot of effort looking at your wiring or you can resolve the problem in one day.

Gotta agree with Marvin, if it has the "light weight" permanent magnet starter do yourself a favor and get a good wire wound unit like the B&C or NL.

I agree that the NL starter is an upgrade in cranking performance but considering that repeatedly time and again here in the forums I see people troubleshooting with a credit card. It is sad and frustrating to see people spend a lot of money trying to resolve a problem without ever confirming some of the basics. Often times thy even say they have done a bunch of testing but because of lack of experience they didn't get any useful or valid information.
It is for that reason that blindly swapping a part will be the last thing I recommend.

__________________Any opinions expressed in this message are my own and not necessarily those of my employer.

I suspect, and it proved true with our -10, that the master solenoid health can be an issue. Another -10 owner a bit north of us also had the same issue.

Getting the right solenoid and mounting it the right way up helps with having good contacts and less drop under load. Or so I am told.

Also in winter on cold mornings oil and batteries don't help. We use Phillips 20W-50 and camguard for what it is worth. (Camguard has nothing to do with this other than we use it for hopefully better corrosion protection).

__________________
______________________________

David Brown

The two best investments you can make, by any financial test, an EMS and APS!

Alan,
I'd have to generally agree with the comments so far. The 14 I flew has the NL Starter so it had no issues (230 + hrs) doing the cranking.
If the improved ground cabling (1st cheap option) doesn't fix the problem then a look at the Master solenoid may be the next cheap option ( I supplied the solenoid that David mentioned for the OP) followed by the B&C starter.
FWIW & IMO the B&C products are the bees knees, they have always been the best & my unit is still working after 2400+ hrs without any work done on it despite me asking B&C if I should send it over for a refurbish - after sending pictures of it they said no need to do that & just keep using it. That's confidence on their part
Hopefully you get this sorted cost effectively

I agree that the NL starter is an upgrade in cranking performance but considering that repeatedly time and again here in the forums I see people troubleshooting with a credit card. It is sad and frustrating to see people spend a lot of money trying to resolve a problem without ever confirming some of the basics. Often times thy even say they have done a bunch of testing but because of lack of experience they didn't get any useful or valid information.
It is for that reason that blindly swapping a part will be the last thing I recommend.

For the most part I agree with the above, however, the starter system is a difficult one to troubleshoot effectively. Trying to crank the engine with a starter that is faulty or "stalled" and take voltage readings is difficult and does not necessarily give valid test results, if you can get any results at all without a meltdown. You can jump the master solenoid to elimate that but the starter and starter sol not so easy.

The big problem with the PM starters is their massive current draw which can easily be upwards of 400 amps, this heavily taxes even the best battery and components in the system. The typical WW starter draws about half that much and therefore the system can tolerate components that are less than perfect, which includes the battery itself. So it takes a "perfect" system to work with the PM starter while the WW units will work fine with something less than "perfect".

The only reason vendors use the PM starter is because it the cheapest and the lightest which make the sales numbers look good.

The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.